Deputy accuses Sheriff's Office of reprisal

Friday

Jul 27, 2007 at 12:01 AM

By ALICE WALLACESun staff writer

A sergeant at the Alachua County Sheriff's Office has been on paid suspension for about 18 weeks pending the outcome of an administrative investigation, but the sergeant's attorney believes the recent investigation was filed in retaliation for an earlier incident.

Though Sheriff Sadie Darnell would not comment on the nature of the recent investigation, this is the second time since January that Sgt. Chad Scott has been the subject of an investigation.

Scott first became the subject of an investigation in January when he was tied to allegations of misconduct regarding another deputy. A woman alleged that Scott and the deputy had met her and her friend while they were on duty and had sex with them, according to the completed investigation.

The Sheriff's Office's investigation found that the sexual allegations against Scott were not true, but the investigation did sustain two charges against him: violating the policy of truthfulness in his testimony and failing to properly supervise the deputy who also allegedly had sex on duty.

After the first investigation was completed in March, Darnell recommended that Scott be demoted to the rank of deputy and receive 15 days suspension.

However, all officials who are the subject of an internal investigation at the Sheriff's Office then have 30 days to challenge the disciplinary action, which Scott did.

So the case was then heard by a Career Service Appeals Board, which is made up of five law enforcement members who are essentially charged with reviewing whether the punishment fits the crime. Scott's attorney, Chris Chestnut, also attended the review board hearing in May and presented evidence that challenged the investigation's findings. The review board voted 3-2 to overturn the sheriff's recommended penalty, and in their memo to the sheriff, the members wrote, "All of the Board members expressed concerns that the investigation and investigation review were not as thorough as they should have been to sustain the allegations against Sgt. Chad Scott."

After receiving the memo, Darnell wrote back to the members, saying the board had "stepped outside its defined bounds" by commenting on the quality of the investigation.

"Although I am bound to the decision to reinstate Deputy Scott's rank and to reimburse him for the 15-day suspension, the findings of the investigation remain pertinent and will continue to stand," Darnell wrote back to the review board members in May. Darnell said Thursday that the review board is tasked with only reviewing the punishment, and not the content of the investigation. She said a separate complaint review board could have been called to review the investigation.

"He did not choose to do that," Darnell said. "They went the career service route."

But even after the review board overturned Scott's discipline, he remained on paid suspension. And it wasn't until earlier this week that his attorneys learned it was because of a second investigation that started right after the first.

"I really think the root of this is retaliation," said Chestnut, Scott's attorney.

Chestnut said he has heard reports that, before the first administrative investigation was closed, Darnell illegally spoke about the ongoing investigation to other officials.

"It's a misdemeanor offense to discuss the particulars of an investigation that is ongoing. The sheriff, in violation of that law, announced at multiple meetings that Chad Scott was under investigation," Chestnut said, noting that the sheriff even went so far as to say that Scott's misconduct was so severe that he would not be returning to work.

However, the sheriff denies giving any specific information about the investigation to any other officials.

"I did comment about an ongoing investigation, which is perfectly within my right to do," she said. "What I cannot do, or anyone cannot do ... is comment on the specifics of an investigation."

Darnell could not say exactly when the second investigation began, but she said it was around the time that the first one was completed.

"Another one came in," she said. "Complaints come in and we have to look at them thoroughly and fairly."

Alice Wallace can be reached at 352-338-3109 or alice.wallace@gvillesun.com.